Key Takeaways
- The Durban Regional Court heard detailed affidavits and testimony revealing an alleged human‑trafficking ring that lured young women from Gauteng with false job offers.
- Victims were told they would work selling SIM cards or in a call centre, but were instead forced into webcam sexual performances, escort services, and other forms of online sexual exploitation.
- Investigators allege the businessman‑accused sexually assaulted two complainants during private interviews and acted as the operation’s “boss,” while his co‑accused, Selvan Rungasamy Naidoo, facilitated the scheme.
- Digital forensics showed repeated visits to adult‑content sites and communication between the suspects; police had to break down a door to rescue the women after they contacted relatives.
- The State opposed bail, citing witness‑intimidation risks, prior convictions, and possible police‑service connections, but the court granted both men bail under strict conditions (passport surrender, regular reporting).
- The defence maintains the businessman was unaware of any criminal activity, claims he voluntarily cooperated with police, and argues the charges relate only to alleged touching of two complainants.
- The case is set for further hearing on 22 October 2026, with investigators anticipating four additional arrests.
Overview of Charges and Allegations
The businessman, whose identity is protected because he faces separate sexual‑assault charges, and his co‑accused Selvan Rungasamy Naidoo appeared in the Durban Regional Court on charges that paint a grim picture of organized exploitation. The businessman is accused of trafficking in persons, sexual assault, kidnapping, procurement, cyber fraud, crimen injuria, conspiracy, and violations of the Films and Publications Act. Naidoo faces a similar slate of charges, except for kidnapping, attempted conspiracy, and the sexual‑assault count. Both men have been ordered by the court to have no contact with any witnesses or other suspects linked to the investigation, a standard precaution aimed at preserving the integrity of the forthcoming trial.
Bail Decision and Conditions
During the bail hearing on Wednesday, Detective Warrant Officer Karl Sanders of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) presented the State’s case, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the risk of witness interference. Despite the State’s opposition, the magistrate granted bail: the businessman was released on R50,000 bail, while Naidoo received R100,000 bail. Both releases are subject to stringent conditions, including the surrender of their passports and mandatory regular reporting to the police. The court’s decision reflects a balancing act between the presumption of innocence and the need to safeguard the investigation while the matter proceeds toward a trial date set for 22 October 2026.
Recruitment Through Fraudulent Job Offers
According to Sanders’ testimony, the alleged trafficking operation began in February and March 2022, targeting vulnerable young women from Eldorado Park in Gauteng. The recruits were approached with promises of legitimate employment at a company called ICLICK, specifically offering work selling SIM cards or positions in a call centre. The women believed they were travelling to Durban for honest, wage‑earning jobs. Instead, upon arrival at a residence in Durban North, they were informed that the actual work involved sexual exploitation—a stark contrast to the job descriptions they had been given.
Nature of the Exploitation
Once at the Durban North property, the complainants were allegedly instructed to engage in a range of sexually explicit activities. The State asserted that the women were expected to perform webcam sexual shows, pose naked online, provide escort services, and engage in sexual acts with paying clients who contacted them via internet platforms. Online profiles were created for each victim, and overseas clients would direct their activities over the web. A portion of the earnings generated from these activities was allegedly siphoned off by those running the operation, leaving the women with little or no compensation for the forced labour they endured.
Intimidation, Confinement, and Control
Detective Sanders detailed a pattern of intimidation designed to keep the victims compliant and prevent escape. The women were allegedly told they would never see their families again, forbidden from contacting friends, and warned that the property belonged to a police officer—an implication meant to instil fear of reporting to authorities. Furthermore, the complainants were said to have been locked inside a bedroom from the outside while under constant surveillance, effectively confining them to the premises and removing any realistic opportunity to seek help or flee the situation.
Alleged Sexual Assault by the Businessman‑Accused
The investigating officer alleged that the businessman personally interviewed each woman upon their arrival at the Durban North residence. During two of these private meetings, Sanders claimed, the businessman sexually assaulted two complainants by touching their breasts and buttocks. Police further contend that the businessman was regarded as the “boss” of the operation, instructing the women to wear revealing clothing whenever he visited the premises. This alleged conduct adds a layer of personal sexual violence to the broader charges of trafficking and exploitation.
Digital Evidence and the Rescue Operation
The State presented digital forensic findings that allegedly linked the accused to the illicit enterprise. Investigators reportedly discovered repeated access to websites commonly used for adult content on devices associated with the suspects, and cellphone evidence showed communication between the businessman and Naidoo that appeared to coordinate the victims’ activities. After the women managed to alert relatives and friends about their plight, police were compelled to break down a door to rescue them. The timely intervention prevented further harm and secured crucial evidence that now forms part of the prosecution’s case.
Concerns Over Witness Interference and State Opposition to Bail
In arguing against bail, Sanders highlighted several factors that, in the State’s view, increased the risk of witness tampering or obstruction of justice. He pointed to the businessman’s prior criminal convictions, allegations surrounding the processing of a firearm competency certificate, and claims that he possessed contacts within law‑enforcement circles who could influence the investigation or obtain confidential police information. Additionally, the detective referenced alleged approaches made to witnesses and expressed concerns raised by Naidoo’s legal team regarding threats to his family. These considerations led the State to urge the court to deny bail or impose exceptionally strict conditions.
Defence Narrative and the Court’s Final Ruling
In contrast, the businessman submitted an affidavit denying any threat to the public and rejecting the notion that he participated in a trafficking enterprise. He stated that he voluntarily handed over his cellphone to investigators, fully cooperated with police, and maintained that the charges against him pertain only to the alleged touching of two complainants’ breasts and buttocks. The defence explained that the ICLICK call‑centre project was launched after the businessman faced financial sequestration preventing him from operating a business; Naidoo was introduced as someone experienced in the call‑centre industry and was allowed to use a family‑owned property temporarily while another site was being prepared. The businessman claimed he was unaware of any criminal activity, expressed shock at discovering female employees in various states of undress during a visit, and noted that police searched his home shortly thereafter with no further developments until his arrest years later. Despite the State’s objections, the court granted both accused bail under the conditions outlined, scheduling the next court appearance for 22 October 2026 while indicating that investigators anticipate four additional arrests as the probe continues.